Message-Id: <199511170630.BAA17114@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Fri, 17 Nov 1995 00:58:08 -0500
Reply-To: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: TECH: lambda and "ka" revisited
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR

la lojbab cusku di'e

> OK, let me present a practical, if contrived, problem or two.
>
> Team A is better (xagmau) than Team B in leka Their running backs' speed
> which I would have done as "leka le kelcnraninbeka cu sutra"
>
> (I was going to say le mela runin. bek. , buit am unsure if that fits your
> new version of "me" %^)
>
> I don;t see how to even elicit the required lambda variable, unles it is
> "leka le xu'eda kelcnraninbeka cu sutra".  Is this what you intend?

That's how I would do it too:

        abu xagmau by le ka le ke'a kelcnraninbeki cu sutra

(Until I know more about the proposal I refuse to use a PA for what
to me should clearly be a KOhA.)

Of course, {ke'a} (or whatever is the lambda variable) can be elided
when it is clear from context, so your first choice is perfectly
acceptable, too. It just may be vague. (e.g. it could mean that A is better
than B in that the running backs are faster at doing them: {abu xagmau by
le ka le kelcnraninbeki cu sutra ke'a}.) There is no rule that the
lambda variable must be explicited, but it has to be if you want to
avoid possible misinterpretations.

Jorge